Abstract
Roundabouts have become increasingly popular in recent years as an innovative operational and safety solution at both low volume
and high volume intersections. Roundabouts have a number of advantages over traffic signals depending on the conditions. They
reduce the severity of crashes since head-on and right-angle conflicts are nearly eliminated. They reduce through traffic speeds to
provide a calmer roadway environment. This study appraised Airport roundabout on the Antoa Road in Kumasi, Ghana using
micro simulation model. Traffic and geometric data were collected on the field. The analysis revealed that Airport roundabout was
operating at a level of service F, which represented worst conditions. Signalized intersection with 4 approach lanes on the two
principal arterials was proposed to control all the movements. Exclusive pedestrian phases were proposed to protect pedestrians.
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 Site Selection and Description
Airport roundabout was selected based on its accident and
safety records in the past and also the levels of congestion
associated with the roundabout. Airport Roundabout Airport
roundabout has five (5) legs with two (2) approach/entry and
exit lanes on all legs, except the Manhyia/Kejetia and the
Buokrom legs, which have one (1) approach/entry and exit
lanes as shown in Fig 1. Airport roundabout is the intersection
of two (2) Principal arterials and a local road, namely:
Okomfo Anokye road - Principal Arterial, Antoa road Principal Arterial, and Airport road Local road as shown in
Fig. 1.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
238
Fig-1: Geometry of Airport Roundabout; Source: BCEOM and ACON Report (2004)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
239
F F
L
t F t
Eq. (1)
Where,
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
240
hs t L m kV2 bk V1 t V2 T
Eq. (2)
Where,
hs(t) = desired space headway at time t,
L = length of leading vehicle,
m = minimum car-following distance (PITT constant),
k = car-following sensitivity factor for following vehicle,
b = relative sensitivity constant,
v1(t) = speed of leading vehicle at time t, and
v2(t) = speed of following vehicle at time t.
Equation above can be solved for the following vehicles
acceleration, given by the equation 3.
2 x y L m V2 K T bk V1 t V2 t
T 2 KT
Eq. (3)
Where,
a = the acceleration of the following vehicle,
T = the duration of the scanning interval,
x = position of the leading vehicle, and
y = position of the following vehicle.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
241
Eq. (4)
Where,
Qe is the entry flow into the circulatory area in passenger car
units per hour (pcu/hr)
Qc is the flow in the circulatory area in conflict with the entry
flow in passenger car units per hour (pcu/hr).
K = 1-0.00347( - 30) 0.978(1/r 0.05)
F = 303X2
fc = 0.21tD(1+0.2X2)
tD = 1+0.5/(1+M)
M = exp[(D 60)/10]
X2 = v + (e v)/(1+2S)
S = 1.6(e v)/l
e = entry width (metres) - measured from a point normal to the
rear kerbside
v = approach half-width: measured along a normal from a
point in the approach stream from any entry flare
l = average effective flare length: measured along a line
drawn at right angles from the widest point of the entry flare
ICU (%)
55
55<ICU<64
64<ICU<73
73<ICU<82
82<ICU<91
91<ICU<100
1005<ICU<109
>109%
Grading Criteria
Intersection has no congestion
Intersection has very little congestion
Intersection has no major congestion
Intersection normally has no congestion
Intersection is on the verge of congested conditions
Intersection is over capacity and likely experiences congestion periods of
15 to 60 consecutive minutes
Intersection is 9% over capacity and experiences congestion periods of 60
to 120 consecutive minutes.
The intersection is 9% or greater over capacity and could experience
congestion periods of over 120 minutes per day.
Anloga Jn
Krofrom
Kejetia
Buokrom
Airport
Total
Anloga Jn
Krofrom
Kejetia
Buokrom
Airport
Total
0
1896
989
542
65
3492
1452
0
198
322
36
2008
900
189
0
1230
49
2368
860
563
960
0
23
2406
26
35
33
13
0
107
3238
2683
2180
2107
173
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
242
Approaches
1452
900
860
26
198
989
960
33
1896
189
563
35
322
1230
542
13
36
49
23
65
East (SBSE), V16 had the lowest hourly flow rate of 13veh/hr
meaning 13 vehicles traversed the South Bound South East
direction within an hour.
Approach Volume, Va
Va,E = V1+V2+V3+V4
Va,W = V5+V6+V7+V8
Va,N = V9+V10+V11+V12
Va,S = V13+V14+V15+V16
Va,SE = V17+V18+V19+V20
3238
2683
2180
2107
173
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
243
Circulating Flow
Vc,E = V1+V2+V3+V4
Vc,W = V5+V6+V7+V8
Vc,N = V9+V10+V11+V12
Vc,S = V13+V14+V15+V16
Vc,SE = V17+V18+V19+V20
Flow, Qc
(veh/hr)
1858
3088
3403
3177
Flow in pcu/hr
(x1.1)
2044
3397
3743
3495
Factored Flow
(x1.125)
2299
3821
4211
3932
5177
5695
6407
Table -6: Entry capacity, circulating flow and reserve capacity for the approaches at Airport Roundabout
Parameters
Entry width, e
Approach Half width, v
Average Effective Flare
Length, l
Sharpness of Flare, S
Inscribed Circle Diameter,
D
Entry Angle,
Entry Radius, r
M
X2
tD
fc
F
K
Qc
Qe
Airport
7.7
7
15
Krofrom
7.7
7
15
Anloga Jn
7.7
7
15
Buokrom
7.7
7
15
Kejetia
7.7
7
15
0.07467
78
0.07467
78
0.07467
78
0.07467
78
0.07467
78
60
60
6.04965
7.60905
1.07093
0.56714
2305.5418
0.9285
1752
1218
60
60
6.04965
7.60905
1.07093
0.56714
2305.5418
0.9285
3821
128
60
60
6.04965
7.60905
1.07093
0.56714
2305.5418
0.9285
4211
-77
60
60
6.04965
7.60905
1.07093
0.56714
2305.5418
0.9285
3932
70
60
60
6.04965
7.60905
1.07093
0.56714
2305.5418
0.9285
6407
-1233
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
244
Approaches
Circulating
flow, Qc
Anloga Jn
Krofrom
Kejetia
Buokrom
Airport
4211
3821
6407
3932
1752
Entry
capacity
(pcu/hr)
-77
128
-1233
70
1218
Entry flow
(pcu/hr)
3238
2683
2180
2107
173
Reserve
capacity
(%)
-166
3589
-1598
-2893
114
Flow to
capacity
ratio
2.66
-34.89
16.98
29.93
-0.14
Intersection
Airport Roundabout
Control Type
Roundabout
v/c ratio
4.48
ICU %
187.9
ICU LOS
H
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
245
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
246
Movement
NWBL
NWBT
NWBR
NWBR2
SEBL
SEBL2
SEBT
SEBR
NEBL
NEBT
NEBR
NEBR2
SWBL2
SWBL
SWBT
SWBR
WBL
WBL2
WBR
WBR2
From
(Area)
Anloga Jn
Krofrom
Kejetia
Buokrom
Airport
No. of
Lanes
1
2
1
Lane
width
(m)
3.3
3.3
4.8
4.0
2
1
1
2
1
3.3
4.8
4.0
3.3
4.8
1
2
1
1
4.0
3.3
4.8
3.4
3.4
Storage
Length
(m)
150.0
120.0
shared
150.0
shared
120.0
80.0
120.0
shared
shared
100.0
100.0
shared
shared
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the management of
Kumasi Polytechnic, Kumasi headed by the Rector Prof.
N.N.N. Nsowah-Nuamah, for providing financial assistance
and also Department of Urban Roads (DUR), Kumasi for
giving information on Airport roundabout in the Kumasi
Metropolis. Several supports from staff of the Civil
Engineering Department, Kumasi Polytechnic, Kumasi are
well appreciated.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
247
AUTHOR PROFILES
Abena Obiri-Yeboah (Mrs) is a PhD Transportation
Engineering Student at the Civil Engineering Department at
the College of Engineering, KNUST-Kumasi. She holds an
MSc. in Road and Transportation Engineering. Her research
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 12 | Dec-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org
248